Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Bad Analogy (Score 1) 546

by clf8 (#47822859) Attached to: Does Learning To Code Outweigh a Degree In Computer Science?

Coder == Carpenter
Degree == Architect

Being able to write code is a skill. You can put together some good stuff, but you wouldn't want them designing a skyscraper.
Now a carpenter who has lots of experience definitely picks up many tricks of the trade and will understand things better. But can they do the math to understand how wind shear should be accounted for, how many elevators are needed for the occupancy, or all of the fire codes? Is that to say an architect can build a beautiful piece of furniture? Not necessarily but a skilled carpenter certainly will.

Now someone with a CS or CE degree will be able to write code, not only from their first year basic course, but having to implement basic algorithms and data structures. Later, they'll get into Design Patterns to understand useful structures. They'll get into OS courses to understand inter-process communications and race conditions. And finally and potentially most importantly, they'll eventually learn how to evaluate their algorithms to ensure they're doing things in the most efficient manner.

Depending on what types of apps you're writing, simply knowing coding can be plenty. But at some scale and/or level of complexity, 4 years of college coupled with an internship/co-op of actual experience will outweigh just coding. Yes, experience will certainly get you there as will lots of personal motivation and curiosity. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of kick ass carpenters but sometimes you need something more.

Image

Fine Print Says Game Store Owns Your Soul 262

Posted by samzenpus
from the anything-to-beat-this-level dept.
mr_sifter writes "UK games retailer GameStation revealed that it legally owns the souls of thousands of customers, thanks to a clause it secretly added to the online terms and conditions for its website. The 'Immortal Soul Clause' was added as part of an attempt to highlight how few customers read the terms and conditions of an online sale. GameStation claims that 88 percent of customers did not read the clause, which gives legal ownership of the customer's soul over to the UK-based games retailer. The remaining 12 percent of customers however did notice the clause and clicked the relevant opt-out box, netting themselves a £5 GBP gift voucher in the process."

Comment: Re:Ouch! (Score 2, Informative) 557

by clf8 (#29817987) Attached to: Apple Blurs the Server Line With Mac Mini Server

Actually, with the 27" iMac you can actually use that as an external monitor. So, you could get yourself an iMac and use it until it's obsolete, then use it merely as a display. Not quite sure if/how you would switch between internal/external source (maybe a KVM switch could work), but you could then turn the iMac into a server when you upgrade to whatever next.

Comment: Re:Dual NIC woulda been nice (Score 2, Insightful) 557

by clf8 (#29817957) Attached to: Apple Blurs the Server Line With Mac Mini Server

Dual NIC would have resulted in a fair amount of changes. As it is (as someone mentioned earlier), they just stack in a second drive where the optical drive was. The only other difference is the case doesn't have a slot, and frankly they probably could have left that there too. Otherwise, everything is identical. Now dual NIC, you've changed the back of the case as well. More importantly, you've now changed the motherboard and are now designing 2 computers instead of just 1.

You probably won't get a massive market for this, but this is a simple and cost effective way for Apple to provide a basic server. Now if they'd only go the media center route, give me HDMI out and BluRay, and it would be sitting under my TV the second I could buy one. And really, DVI out is probably ok for that, so they could do the exact same thing and just offer me BluRay.

Comment: Re:Lack of bandwidth is not Apple's fault (Score 4, Interesting) 551

by clf8 (#29298763) Attached to: iPhone Straining AT&T Network

Said it once, and I'll say it again. CDMA is a dead end, the world is moving to LTE. Why would anyone waste their resources on a technology with such a limited lifespan. Globally there are significantly more GSM networks than CDMA, and GSM is a natural transition to LTE. Until Verizon supports LTE (which won't be all that long), you won't see the iPhone there. Period.

Sure, they could have opened up to more carriers in the US, like T-Mobile. But look, I'm sure AT&T offered them gobs of money to be exclusive. And yeah, AT&T's network has been, well, terrible, but did that stop everyone from upgrading to the iPhone 3G when it came out?

I've been thinking about this article since I read it yesterday, and I think AT&T just screwed up their pricing model. Maybe their estimates were completely off on what they thought people would use for data. Maybe it is partially Apple's fault because they dictated some pricing terms (I do not have any idea). But if you look at simple economics, AT&T vastly misjudged the demand for data on their network versus the supply. It is understandable, previous smartphones couldn't do as much as easily or eloquently. AT&T should have charged more for an unlimited plan, and tiered pricing for capped services. As it is, they're leaving money on the table that could have been used to truly upgrade their networks. Is AT&T's cell plan cheap, not really, but would that have stopped people? Sure, there's an upper bound, but I believe AT&T's pricing is well below that.

Comment: Re:cat and mouse (Score 5, Insightful) 396

by clf8 (#28811001) Attached to: Palm Pre iTunes Syncing Back With WebOS 1.1 Update

You buy the Apple products because you LIKE the Apple products, and you LIKE the way they work together.

Now PalmPre starts syncing with iTunes, but doesn't sync right. That will look bad on Apple. Let's say the PalmPre somehow effs up your library. That will look bad on Apple. Sure, Apple can say 'we don't support the Pre' but if you're music library is hosed you're going to be mad at Apple.

Look at the Motorola Rokr, they licensed the technology from Apple to allow it to Sync. And Apple guaranteed it would work right and not screw anything up. I'm actually surprised (for better or worse) that Apple hasn't invoked the DCMA.

What Apple does NOT want to do is become Windows and have to support 80 billion solutions under the sun. Their strength is and always has been tight integration. Having to lose focus on that and suddenly deal with problems with every Tom, Dick, and Harry syncing with iTunes will delay new features and products.

Comment: Re:Bashing Competitors (Score 1) 770

by clf8 (#28257191) Attached to: Apple's WWDC Unveils iPhone 3.0, OpenCL, Laptop Updates, and More

No one remembers "Redmond, fire up your copiers" ???

Yes, since Apple has had a resurgence they have been cocky. But hey, they make some pretty decent hardware, that works extremely well with their software and other accessory products. Microsoft's done the same.

Is it 'appropriate'? Tough call, I think a lot of old school Apple die hards still feel like the underdog and so they enjoy bragging a bit. And Wall Street loves its brash, obnoxious characters in general.

Comment: Re:Work first, then get an MBA (Score 1) 834

by clf8 (#27906945) Attached to: Go For a Masters, Or Not?

You're suggesting 4 years of schooling to be in a job for 4 years...to then go back to school for 2 more years to do something completely different. Ummm, why not just get the MBA to begin with.

Yes, a lot of engineers go MBA, or the consulting route. But if you're going to get an MBA after 4-5 years, why waste the time getting an engineering degree and working in the industry. Sure, technical knowledge will make you a better manager, but the timelines you lay out sound like a waste to me.

Comment: MS worked for me (Score 1) 834

by clf8 (#27905559) Attached to: Go For a Masters, Or Not?

Contrary to others, an MS in Computer Engineering directly translated to both a higher job rank and salary over people hired at the exact same time at the same company. Regardless, I got my MS because it was a 5 year BS/MS program, and I felt it would be something additional to help set myself apart from everyone else. Used to be a college degree set you apart, but I didn't feel that was quite the case anymore.

On a more practical note, consider the job market and economy at the moment. If you believe things will improve, then why not hide out in academics and learn more, especially if you think you'll want a MS. You don't want to come back in 5-10 years, have to take the GRE, and change your lifestyle from that nice cushy salaried life to going back to ramen. Plus you could have a family by then further limiting your options.

As for job experience, co-op education and interning are great for that (but you may be a bit late). What you don't want is to graduate and waste a year looking for a job. Or getting a job an getting laid off a year or two later. I, for one, would not want to be entering the job market today.

Comment: Re:Verizon rejected.... (Score 1) 237

by clf8 (#27729475) Attached to: Why AT&T Wants To Keep the iPhone Away From Verizon

Just swap out the modem, change some code, EASY! How's that go?
1. Swap out modem
2. ???
3. Profit!

No, actually it's not. Sure, if Apple did things right it would be relatively easy, but it's going to take time and effort. For a dead technology with a limited market.

When VZW goes LTE, then the iPhone will technically work on their network. Of course, the carriers and/or Apple will likely try to keep the phone on whatever network it's supposed to be on.

Comment: Re:I don't get it. (Score 1) 324

by clf8 (#27480353) Attached to: Google's Plan For Out-of-Print Books Is Challenged

From my understanding, there's two issues at stake:
1. Google's library of books
2. Google's registry of orphaned books.

So Google's scanning in all works, and in cases where it's not an orphaned book (but allowed in their databases by the author), the author will get a cut.

Google's registry of orphaned books, however, is solely owned by Google. They've done the effort of tracking down the owner in this case, and having found none they're maintaining their reasoning for considering the book orphaned. They've presumably performed the legwork to make this determination. As it's their resource, they have no responsibility to provide this to the world.

So, some other company can come through and scan all the books they like and make them available online as well. In cases where those books are not orphans, they'll need deals with the author/publisher. In other cases, they'll have to do their own legwork to track down the history of the book, why should Google have to give up this IP?

Of course, I can license info from the registry, I just can't get info on orphaned books. However, if the registry doesn't turn up information, it may be a safe assumption that it is an orphaned book. You'd still want to verify, but that would take significantly less effort than tracking down every single book.

Everything's a monopoly until someone else does it. And Google isn't blocking anyone, however they are protecting some IP (their proof that books are orphans).

To avoid criticism, do nothing, say nothing, be nothing. -- Elbert Hubbard

Working...